On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 20:27 -0400, Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: > On Jul 16, 2005, at 1:39 AM, Sven de Marothy wrote: > > This was in response to Rodrigo saying "Harmony can't use Qt". Let's > > forget for a second that Qt is available in FOSS versions, and just > > consider it as a proprietary library: > > > > Where's the fundamental difference between building peers on one > > proprietary library (Qt) and the proprietary libraries which happen to > > be distributed with proprietary OSes? I don't see any. > > > > In terms of "proprietaryness", no - there is no difference. But I > read it as we'd force people to go get Windows or OS X (I'd vote for > OS X...) in order to use Harmony, where we'd be counting on the > required software being there for those that use Windows or OS X > because it ships with the os...
That's merely a practical difference, not one of principle. Nobody wants to 'force' anybody to anything. Who said that? /Sven
